RankLens
SEO and analytics services
Fix what search engines actually measure — then prove the change.
Technical SEO for people who own the code. We work on the things that need an engineer - rendering, crawl efficiency, structured data, Core Web Vitals and a measurement setup that still works without third-party cookies - rather than on keyword volume reports.
Screens
What it looks like
4 screens from the working demo — the same data you will see if you open it.
The problem
Why this gets built
Most SEO work stops at keywords in a document. Rankings are decided by crawlability, page speed, structured data and whether the pages resolve cleanly at all — which are engineering problems, not copywriting ones.
Who it is for
Fit
Businesses whose site exists but does not appear — and who want the engineering fixed, not a monthly report.
Capabilities
What the system does.
Technical site audit
Crawl and index coverage, broken links, redirect chains, duplicate content, missing metadata and structured data.
Core Web Vitals
LCP, INP and CLS measured on real pages and fixed in the code, not masked by a plugin.
Analytics & events
Proper event tracking and conversion funnels, so traffic numbers connect to something that matters.
Keyword tracking
Position monitoring over time with movement attributed to the change that caused it.
Competitor visibility
Where you sit against the sites already ranking for your terms.
Reporting you can act on
What moved, why, and what to do next month.
See it running
RankLens is a clickable demo — open the modules, browse the tables, see how the screens fit together.
Buying decision
Why off-the-shelf falls short here.
Most SEO engagements stop at the boundary of the codebase. They produce a keyword list, a content calendar and a list of recommendations that someone else is supposed to implement, and the recommendations that matter most are the ones that need a developer. Six months later the audit is still open.
For software products the technical layer is usually where the ranking is lost. A client-rendered page that Googlebot sees empty, a canonical that points at a parameterised duplicate, a sitemap that disagrees with the robots rules, a Largest Contentful Paint dominated by a font, an hreflang set that returns 404 in one language. None of those are content problems and none are fixed by writing more.
We implement rather than recommend. The same people who diagnose the crawl problem write the fix, which is why this is a service a development studio can offer honestly and a reporting agency generally cannot.
Comparison
Packaged product vs a custom build.
The differences that decide it, for this sector specifically.
| Aspect | Packaged product | Custom build |
|---|---|---|
| Deliverable | An audit document | Merged code, with the audit as a by-product |
| Rendering | Assumed to work | Verified against what the crawler actually receives, not what the browser shows |
| Structured data | A plugin's defaults | Entity-level markup that reconciles across the site, validated in test |
| Core Web Vitals | A lab score | Field data from real users, with the fix in the build pipeline |
| Measurement | A tracking tag | Server-side and log-based where it survives blockers, with consent handled correctly |
| Reporting | Rankings for a chosen keyword set | Impressions, queries and pages from Search Console, including the terms you did not choose |
Integrations
What it connects to.
A system that cannot reach the tools already in use becomes another island. These are the connections this sector normally needs.
Search Console and Bing Webmaster
Verified, with sitemaps submitted and coverage monitored rather than checked once.
Analytics
GA4 where you need it, or privacy-preserving log and server-side analytics where you do not.
Build pipeline
Sitemaps, structured data and performance budgets generated by the build, so they cannot go stale.
IndexNow
Instant submission to Bing and Yandex on publish, with Google handled through Search Console.
CDN and origin
Compression, caching and protocol configuration, which are ranking factors before they are hosting details.
How it runs
From first conversation to cutover.
Indicative for a build of this shape. The parallel run is not optional — nothing is retired until the numbers agree.
- 1-2 weeks
Technical audit
Crawl, render, index and performance, against the live site rather than a staging copy.
- 2-4 weeks
Foundation fixes
Indexability, canonicals, structured data and the measurement setup - the work everything else depends on.
- 2-3 weeks
Performance
Core Web Vitals in field data, addressed in the code rather than with a caching plugin.
- Ongoing
Content and monitoring
Buyer-intent pages built against real Search Console queries, with regressions caught by monitoring.
After rollout
What changes day to day.
- The pages you want indexed are indexed, which is a surprisingly common place to be losing.
- Search Console shows the queries you are already close on, which is a better content brief than any keyword tool.
- Performance work targets field data, so it improves both ranking and the experience that converts.
- Measurement survives ad blockers and cookie rejection, so the numbers you decide on are real.
Described qualitatively on purpose. We do not publish percentage improvements we cannot attribute to a named client with their agreement.
Questions
Common questions.
What does an SEO audit actually cover?
Crawlability and index coverage, broken links and redirect chains, duplicate content, metadata, structured data, and Core Web Vitals measured on real pages rather than a lab score.
How long before rankings improve?
Technical fixes such as page speed and crawl errors often show within weeks. Competitive keyword movement takes months, and anyone promising faster is guessing.
Do you fix the issues or just report them?
We fix them. The findings are engineering problems, so we implement the changes in the code rather than handing over a list.